中信建投基金周紫光业绩长期不佳 或面临降薪风险

Core Viewpoint - The recently issued "Guidelines for Performance Assessment Management of Fund Management Companies" may lead to salary reductions for fund managers whose performance has significantly underperformed benchmarks over the past three years [1] Group 1: Performance Assessment Guidelines - Fund managers whose actively managed equity products underperform benchmarks by more than 10 percentage points and have negative profit margins must see their performance compensation decrease by at least 30% [1] - If the performance is below the benchmark by over 10 percentage points but with positive profit margins, their performance compensation should also decline [1] Group 2: Fund Performance Data - Among the actively managed equity funds under China Citic Bank, several funds have shown poor performance, with the "China Citic Bank Smart Life A" and "China Citic Bank Smart IoT A" being the only two with negative returns this year, down approximately 17% and 7% respectively, underperforming their benchmarks by 34 and 16 percentage points [2] - The "China Citic Bank Low Carbon Growth Mixed A" fund, managed by Zhou Ziguang, has seen a net value drop of around 50% over the last three years, underperforming its benchmark by approximately 70% [3] Group 3: Fund Manager Performance - Zhou Ziguang's management of the "China Citic Bank Technology Theme 6-Month Holding Mixed" fund resulted in a return of 44.31% over nearly three years, but the new manager, Leng Wenpeng, has seen a return close to -9% in the two months since taking over [3] - The "China Citic Bank North Exchange Selected Two-Year Open Mixed A," managed by Leng Wenpeng, has shown a return of nearly 230% over about 1.5 years, outperforming its benchmark by approximately 157 percentage points [4] Group 4: Fund Management Scale - As of the end of Q3 this year, China Citic Bank manages a total of 65 products with a combined management scale of 71.486 billion yuan, ranking 77th in the industry [4] - Compared to the end of last year, the number of products has increased by 9, but the management scale has decreased by nearly 24% [4]